September 2009

Nick Simmons, one of the stars of A&E's Gene Simmons Family Jewels , will be signing copies of his comic book Incarnate at the Long Beach Comic Con. The con takes place on Saturday, October 3 at the Long Beach Convention Center in Long Beach, CA, and Nick will be at the "Center Court" signing area next to the Golden Apple/Atomic Comics booth #555.

Spend your Halloween with the cast of Paranormal State . The 2nd annual PRS Halloween bash will take place at the historically haunted Stanley Hotel in Estes Park, Colorado, October 23 - 25th, 2009. Guests get to stay at the haunted hotel, attend workshops, lectures, a Halloween Masquerade Ball and a special screening of the upcoming film, "American Ghost Hunter."

More: ParaFieldTrip.com

We are saddened by the loss of one of our generation's greatest talents and a member of the A&E family. Patrick's work on 'The Beast' was an inspiration to us all. He will be greatly missed and our thoughts are with his wife Lisa and his entire family during this difficult time.

The cast and crew of the A&E drama series "The Cleaner" have joined together to raise funds to donate two EDAR (Everyone Deserves a Roof) units to the Union Rescue Mission in downtown Los Angeles. An auction is currently running on aetv.auction.seenon.com to raise additional funds.

When Co-Creator and Executive Producer Jonathan Prince first saw the EDAR, he knew he wanted to feature it in "The Cleaner." The unit was featured in "Path of Least Resistance" an episode that aired August 18th on

President Obama's National Drug Control Policy Director Gil Kerlikowske, Acting Administrator of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Eric Broderick, and H. Westley Clark, Director, SAMHSA's Center for Substance Abuse Treatment joined with Bob DeBitetto, President and General Manager, A&E Network and BIO Channel and the 2009 A&E Recovery Delegates at the National Press Club to launch National Alcohol and Drug Addiction Recovery Month (Recovery Month).

On the

Out now – <a href=“http://www.eurekavideo.co.uk/moc/catalogue/nous-ne-vieillirons-pas-ensemble/“>Nous ne vieillirons pas ensemble</a> (1972) and <a href=“http://www.eurekavideo.co.uk/moc/catalogue/passe-ton-bac-dabord//“>Passe ton Bac d’abord</a> (1979) — two films by the late, great French director Maurice Pialat (releases #4 and #5 out of a planned series of 7).

Der "Switch Reloaded"-Comedystar Max Giermann über "TV Total"

Der Ex-Moderator, Kolumnist und TV-Produzent Frieridch Küppersbusch über das Format "Raus aus den Schulden", das seine Firma produziert.

Der Schauspieler Christian Berkel im TV Today Check über 'Der Kriminalist'

Shipments of Sony PlayStation 3 Slim console began today, August 31. I had mine pre-ordered on Amazon.com, so I received mine today. I could have received it three days earlier if Amazon printed address label more clearly – the postal office was ready to ship it back to sender because of “incomplete address”.

The new version of the console is called “Slim” for several good reasons: it’s 33% thinner and 36% lighter then all the previous PlayStation 3 models. It uses less energy, offers 50% more hard drive space (120GB) then the latest 80GB model, and costs only $299 after recent $100 price cut by Sony across all models. After the price cut, I figured it’s finally worth the money, given it’s both gaming console and a Blu-Ray player. Visually the major differences are, obviously, in size; also the case is no longer glossy-black and has cheaper look. The console still has two USB ports in the front. The power toggle button is no longer touch-sensitive – it was replaced with an actual pressable button.

Two years ago I had a bad experience with PS3 60GB model, so I was waiting for this price cut and a thinner model for a long time. Alas, it arrived. The box it arrived in is also thinner then the original 60GB model’s box. The box included a USB cable, a component video cable and the new Dualshock 3 controller. HDMI cable was not included.
Set up about 30 minutes. It included taking away my D-Link media server and Toshiba HD-DVD player out, plugging in PS3 and Logitech PS3 adapter for Harmony remote, downloading and installing latest firmware 3.0, and registering for PlayStation(R) Network. Most of the time was spent trying to enter user data for a new PlayStation(R) Network account one letter at a time.
I didn’t plan to play any games. I just wanted a Blu-Ray player and a powerful media player.
I didn’t try to play any games yet except for a demo of some game I downloaded and it seemed to work, but I deleted it immediately. I haven’t played any DVD or Blu-Ray disks yet. But I did try to stream a movie from my Netflix WatchInstantly queue: Guy Ritchy’s “Revolver”. For those interested how I do it – I use PlayOn media server. Playback started within 5 seconds, was smooth – no jitters, great quality of sounds and good video quality.
Oh, I forgot to mention that I spent at least half an hour reconfiguring Harmony universal remote to use with PlayStation 3. Those who are familiar with Logitech Harmony remotes know that this process is quite simple: remove all devices and activities, add a new device and the software programs the remote with the necessary infra-red commands to turn your TV, amplifier and game console on and swicth the TV and amplifier to proper inputs automatically when you want to start a certain activity on the remote, such as “Watch TV”, “Play a game”, “Watch a digital movie” etc. Overall, the process worked, but I feel I’ll need to spend another hour customizing the on-screen menu on Harmony remote to match the convenience of the Sony’s PlayStation 3 remote for Blu-Ray.
Which bring up a good point: is it worth paying for Harmony remote plus Logitech adapter for Harmony and PlayStation Blu-Ray player remote, when the remote for Blu-Ray from Sony costs only $19? The answer is: depends. If you have as many components as I have that you want to control with a single remote – yes. If all you have is a TV, amplifier and PS3 – you can learn to use one remote for TV+amp, and one $19 remote for PS3’s Blu-Ray player. I had quite a bit of gift certificates for Amazon – enough to pay for the adapter and cover half of the price of the console, so I was able to keep the setup affordable. Others made decide differently.
When playing back streaming media, the unit stays quiet and cool – so the major complaint I had two years ago about PS3 60Gb model has now been eliminated. Whether it will become loud and hot when playing games – I will let you know on this blog.
PlayStation 3 Slim streams Netflix and Hulu movies very happily, and what makes me even more happy is the ability to use my Harmony universal remote with it.
A new 250GB model of PlayStation3 Slim comes out on November 3, 2009, and its suggested retail price is $349.99http://www.FeedBurner.com).gif" />

If you liked this post, buy me a beer

Related posts:

• Sony unveils PlayStation 3 Slim, drops PS3 prices by $100
• New 80GB PlayStation 3 available September 1
• Toshiba announces new 1080p DVD player with XDE
• Finally: Netflix streaming on PlayStation 3 begins in November
• I’m streaming Netflix on PS3!

Copyright © 2008 Maxim (Digital Fingerprint: G-HGReEHdehe93492lsjd_12kjfa (74.125.94.82) )
Send to Facebook

 Related posts

• I’m streaming Netflix on PS3! (0)
• Sony unveils PlayStation 3 Slim, drops PS3 prices by $100 (2)
• New 80GB PlayStation 3 available September 1 (2)
• Finally: Netflix streaming on PlayStation 3 begins in November (0)
• More media servers support Netflix (12)
• Who is winning the format war: Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD (8)
• Sony PlayStation 3 (60GB) (1)

Bookmark

Out now — Georges Franju’s feature debut, <a href=“http://www.eurekavideo.co.uk/moc/catalogue/la-tete-contre-les-murs/“>La Tête contre les murs</a> [Head Against the Wall, 1959] and, on both Blu-ray and DVD, one of F. W. Murnau’s final and greatest achievements, <a href=“http://www.eurekavideo.co.uk/moc/catalogue/sunrise/“>Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans</a> [1927].
Pierre Brasseur, Anouk Aimée, Charles Azanavour, Paul Meurisse, and future director Jean-Pierre Mocky (who also wrote the film’s scenario) come together for Georges Franju’s elegant and poetic-realistic exposé of a psychiatric institution in <a href=“http://www.eurekavideo.co.uk/moc/catalogue/la-tete-contre-les-murs/“>La Tête contre les murs</a>. Said Franju about his subject: “Mental illness is contagious. I’m not able to stay alone with the mentally ill. They are many and I am one. It’s not mental force that prevails — it’s the numbers. I feel hopeless next to them — so subtle are they, so mysterious are they, so full of poetry…” Upon the release of the film, Jean-Luc Godard proclaimed: “In the incomparable Orphée, Jean Marais, being pelted with stones by the false poets, shouts at Heurtebise: ‘What says the marble in which a masterpiece is sculpted?‘ He responds: ‘I am insulted; I am stricken.’ — but he knows he’s wrong. The same goes for the celluloid ribbon upon which Georges Franju imprinted <a href=“http://www.eurekavideo.co.uk/moc/catalogue/la-tete-contre-les-murs/“>La Tête contre les murs</a>.”
F. W. Murnau’s <a href=“http://www.eurekavideo.co.uk/moc/catalogue/sunrise/“>Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans</a> is considered by many to be not only the greatest silent film ever made, but also among the very greatest of all films, a work that pushed the ingenuity of image-building into an entirely new realm and stripped back the notion of plot to its barest essence in order to clearly articulate the universal fundamentals of love and compassion in all mankind. This new MoC release of <a href=“http://www.eurekavideo.co.uk/moc/catalogue/sunrise2/“>Sunrise</a> marks the first-ever global release of a silent film on Blu-ray, and both the high-defintion and standard-def DVD versions include the complete film with its Movietone soundtrack, and the lustrous HD restoration of the slightly shorter Czech print of the movie. <a href=“http://www.eurekavideo.co.uk/moc/catalogue/sunrise2/“>Sunrise</a> is one of the few works about which it feels like neither hyperbole nor cliché to assert: “This is truly the most beautiful of films.”

Orientation / Jump, Push, Fall
Airs September 21st, 2009 @ 9PM on NBC
VOLUME FIVE: REDEMPTION” MAKES A SPECIAL TWO-HOUR DEBUT WITH THE INTRODUCTION OF A MYSTERIOUS CARNIVAL CLAN WHOSE INTENTIONS ARE UNKNOWN, WHILE FAMILIAR FACES ADJUST TO NEW STAGES OF THEIR LIVES THAT WILL CHALLENGE THEIR PERCEPTIONS OF THE WORLD AND THEIR ABILITIES.
NBC Official Episode Description (May Contain Spoilers!) ▼

ROBERT KNEPPER JOINS THE CAST. RAY PARK, ZELJKO IVANEK, MADELINE ZIMA, AND DAWN OLIVIERI GUEST STAR – Claire (Hayden Panettiere) struggles with adjusting to her new life in college when a mysterious death thrusts her into the spotlight once again. Elsewhere, Hiro (Masi Oka) and Ando (James Kyson Lee) continue their noble quest to help people by promoting their abilities. Angela (Cristine Rose) fears Nathan (Adrian Pasdar) will soon discover his true identity; while Matt (Greg Grunberg) is haunted by an unexpected visitor seeking something he has lost. Tracy Strauss (Ali Larter) and H.R.G. (Jack Coleman) join forces, looking for the key to unlock the motive behind a horrific crime. Meanwhile, Peter (Milo Ventimiglia) uses his abilities for good, but he is soon called upon to aid an old friend. While the heroes adjust to their new surroundings, a mysterious carnival clan, led by ringleader Samuel (Robert Knepper), sets their sights on familiar faces. James Kyson Lee and Zachary Quinto also star. Rachel Melvin, Jimmy Jean-Louis, Ashley Crow, Lisa Lackey, Assaf Cohen, and Saemi Nakamura also guest star.

BY AUSTIN BURBRIDGE. LOS ANGELES (CINEMA MINIMA) — The best thing about the annual Production Conference of the Independent Film & Television Alliance is the remarkable candor of the participants. The four-hour morning conference is attended by independent producers and distributors, who attend a keynote, followed by two panel discussions by prominent independent producers and distributors. Everyone is there because they want to exchange information about the business of independent film. There is no publicity or grandstanding — only straight talk. Attending it is a great way to get an accurate sounding of the state of independent film production and distribution.

The September 29, 2009 Conference in Century City in did not disappoint. Bill Mechanic — President/CEO of Pandemonium LLC and former Chairman and CEO of Fox Filmed Entertainment — delivered a bracing assesment of the current state and the future of the independent film business in the keynote speech.

Here is a video of the speech. What follows is a transcript of his remarks, supplied by IFTA:

Greetings. I was asked to address you this morning with my observations on the present as well as the future state of independent production.

But before I begin, I have to relate the story of a close friend of mine, who’s a leading heart surgeon.

He said he’d recently been involved in a very trying and emotional six-hour piece of open heart surgery where he and a team of people fought valiantly, but unsuccessfully, to save a patient.

Afterwards, my friend entered the doctor’s locker room. One of his colleagues was staring absently into the void, clearly spent from the ordeal. He tried to cheer him up, but the colleague turned to him and asked why he was not more distraught.

My friend answered with a smile, “At least we weren’t asked to save Independent Production!”

Well — truth be told — we may not be heart patients; but we aren’t that far away.

We have too many insignificant movies clogging our distribution channels.

Tightening economic conditions are sending sharp pains through our systems. Our blood supply from heretofore vibrant markets such as DVD and TV seemingly have evaporated in front of our eyes.

The question we must ask is, whether the condition is fatal? In all candor, I would say, “Only to some — those who ignore the warning signs; who don’t adjust to the threatening conditions; those producers — and distributors — who pretend there is nothing wrong.”

Nine years ago, I was a healthy (and occasionally happy) studio executive. I had taken Fox over a seven-year period from a doormat to the number-one studio; and before that, I had spent nine years at Disney building a then-dormant minor player into a muscular and, for the first time in its history, a real force in the studio world. I left Fox with five of the top ten films in history and departed Disney with 19 of the top 20 videos ever, and as the number-one International distributor.

I had fought with Rupert Murdoch over my desire to create a business for Fox in the world of animation. He felt no one could compete with Disney. Nevertheless I started up Fox Animation. ANASTASIA was a start, it made money. TITAN AE a misstep, and lost [money]. Even though that is the nature of the business — that not everything works — he didn’t want to wait for ICE AGE to finish production. I didn’t have a foot out of the door before Fox tried to sell off the film. Luckily for them, they couldn’t get a deal done.

At the same time, Peter Chernin thought I was taking too much of a chance with X-MEN. He called it my “$70-million art film,” since everyone knew that not only were comic book movies dead, but you certainly couldn’t start one in a concentration camp. That wasn’t comic book fun. Maybe not, but most comic books are dark, so it was a question of being relevant, of being grounded.

Ironically, both films have lasted longer at Fox than I did and are now the most valuable franchises in the history of that studio, throwing off billions of dollars of profit.

But they also were, along with FIGHT CLUB, the leading reasons I was shown the door. My bosses couldn’t deal with the unconventional choices like those and others such as BRAVEHEART and THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY because the films weren’t pre-sold, and thus, seemed less predictable. This, despite the fact that these unconventional movies guided Fox to the five best years in its history.

When I left, a few of the other majors called to see if I were interested in running their shops. I thought instead it was time to do things on my own, to not work for companies that no longer wanted to be in the film business, that no longer thought enough about the future to not gum it up. Easier to raise money and worry only about making good movies which could make money.

Needless to say, I was naïve. I thought raising money would be easy. I didn’t exactly foresee such things as the Silicon Valley bubble bursting, or the economic meltdown, or the Madoff scandal. But then — I guess the Captain of the Titanic thought the Atlantic was smooth sailing. And Batman thought the Joker would be a laugh.

When I first made the decision to go off on my own, Larry Gordon said to me something that I’ve never forgotten. He said running a studio is a great job but a terrible life. Producing is a great life but a terrible job.

Nine years as an independent producer provides a great perspective. It also cause heart palpitations.

Here’s the one key thing I’ve learned: There is no such thing as an independent producer.

There are only dependent producers: Dependent on distributors, financiers, bankers, and distribution channels that understand the needs of the market even less than the corporations that own the studios.

Which makes a truly independent producer even more truly dependent because the alternatives to the studio system are in many ways more difficult, not easier.

Perhaps even more than the studios, those with the controls over whether or not a movie gets made independent of the studios, do so, almost with less attention to the movie itself.

Part of that is due to outsiders who always seem to come into the business believing they can do better and yet rarely have an idea of what they are doing. Attorneys and financial analysts picking movies is a recipe for disaster. They can tell you all day long what hasn’t recently worked, but in truth, haven’t the experience or the knowledge to do anything different than has already been done.

That has been the oddest lesson of this period for me: That the independent world — which should be aiming to do things better and different from the studios — doesn’t have that as a mandate at all. If anything, the only thing that independent distributors and financiers look for is the same. Maybe costing a little less than the majors but, they want what the studios want, or — in FIGHT CLUB-speak — they want copies of a copy.

I now understand that unconventional choices like X-MEN and ICE AGE would barely have a prayer getting made independently. Why? Because at the time, they didn’t look like anything else.

It’s disrespectful if not downright dumb to think audiences can’t tell the difference between the original — which occasionally might even have some fresh faces — and the copy, which almost always is populated with retreads. It’s like thinking you can sell yesterday’s news under a different banner.

The exception to the rule is DISTRICT 9, which didn’t try to compete with the Majors with special effects or stars or plot. Instead of feeling recycled, it was fresh and is now one of the year’s best and most successful pictures. But lot of credit has to go to Peter Jackson since it was undoubtedly his clout that got the film made.

Following the lead of the majors presumes that they know what they want. It presumes they have a fix on their audiences.

I would say that’s anything but true. Admissions are down over the past few years and — perhaps most troubling — the audience that Hollywood spends the majority of time focusing on, the under-25s, are the ones finding other things to do.

Take a look at this shift over the past decade. While use of the internet and video games have dominated leisure time activities, movie consumption is down or flat over the same period. And — more to the point — you can see that there is a 21% drop in film going amongst the core target audience, and a 24% drop in the next key category, 25–39-year-olds.

And yes, these charts beg another question [sic]: if the audiences are shifting, why isn’t the product shifting as well? Name five mainstream films this year that successfully targeted an over-30 year audience.

In that way, Hollywood in the broadest sense of the word is much like Detroit. It’s a manufacturer’s mentality that reigns, seemingly indifferent to the consumers it serves: Ignore whether the consumer likes our product as long as they buy it; market it and they will come; and don’t worry if they don’t come back. Accept 60% drop off rates as the norm, saying it’s all about wide openings.

Three years ago the [Los Angeles Lakers basketball team] all-but-sold-out every game, even though they had a lousy team. Since Jerry Buss is a smart owner, he knew if he didn’t fix things, no shows would eventually turn into season ticket non-renewals. He did what he needed to do to make it the hottest ticket in town again; and a no-show today is a no-no.

When was the last time you heard anyone either from a studio or an independent talking about improving their product, of creating positive buzz and expanding the audience?

Here’s one basic question to ask yourself: If the most popular film in history was TITANIC — and it did so by weaving together interest in all demographic pockets (as well as pulling in non-film goers) — why in the last 12 years has no attempted to do the same?

TITANIC was number one at the box office for 15 consecutive weeks. It not only spurred on record year in theatrical attendance, and had the biggest video in history, but also generated the biggest Oscar telecast in years. A good movie, like a good team in sports, makes everything around it better.

An independent couldn’t — and shouldn’t — make movies of that scale; but it should make movies [that are] as individualistic and compelling. Certainly there are good examples among some of the smaller independent films — SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE being an easy choice — that actually do stand out and succeed because of their quality and their uniqueness.

But as you can see from these next few charts, the independent world was no more concerned with the consumer than the studios.

With the influx of hedge fund money, the past decade saw a glutting of product, again most of it with no idea of who it was for or how it could be sold.

Whether some of these movies had artistic integrity or not, there is no question there was no audience appeal.

From the low water mark of 1990, there has been a 50% increase in the number of pictures and even since 2000, nearly a 25% increase. And most of the influx came from non-majors, rising from 150 in 1990 to 450 in 2008. That, my friends, is insanity.

Remember that through this entire period, the only growth at the box office has been inflationary, which means more films were fighting for a share of a flat box office. Over approximately this same period, the biggest hits took even a greater share of the box office pie, meaning the independents, even with a vastly greater number of releases, are taking a dramatically smaller percentage of the available money.

Let me get out the rest of the bad news, though I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know.

The next 2-3 years will be even worse, not because of the flood of new releases — since that is already abating — but rather due to the effect the over-saturation has had, combined with the economic downturn.

New money is going to be hard — if not impossible — to find. Ad sales are down, so TV networks around the world (other than cable) aren’t buying. Add in a confused video market and — it’s going to be tough.

To my mind, the next few years will be about survival.

If it’s any consolation, it will be harder on the Studios than the independents. Not only is it harder for big companies to change, to adapt, but there are legacy issues in terms of personnel. And within the next few years, their big market advantage, the bricks and mortar of their distribution operations, will become a disadvantage in the democratic age of digital. I would assume at least two of the Majors to be sold or consolidated by the middle of the decade.

Before I turn to why I don’t think this is all fatal — and in fact, might be a boon — let me address one more item, video. I get asked a lot if the problems are systemic. My answer is, “Not necessarily.” That we would reach a point of maturation in DVD is natural and logical, but too much of the downturn is completely self-imposed.

Like much of the bad decision making that has helped take a lot of the profit out of the business, the air was let out of the tires by the studios themselves.

No top management of a studio really cared what was going on over the past few years other than was their budget being met.

No one asked whether their units should be pushing Blu-Ray in the face of an economic melt-down or even whether or not Blu-Ray was going to be the next big app to the general consumer. They simply accepted the idea that they could resell their libraries at higher prices.

So no one asked what impact dropping the price on their existing DVD’s would have. I mean — if I can buy TITANIC for under $5 in some stores — why am I so eager then to rush out to pay $30 or so when it’s released on Blu Ray? Is the quality difference that great? How many formats are yet to come?

No one asked what buying great movies at cheap prices would do to new releases, which may not be as great. Give a consumer with less expendable dollars a choice between LEGALLY BLONDE for $5 or ALL ABOUT STEVE for $20 or $30, which do I want to buy?

Simply said: The studios have destroyed the price-value relationship in video — particularly when low-priced rental alternatives have sprung up everywhere.

And then, add in the absolute flooding of TV product from the beginning of time into the market, and you have the conditions that have absolutely killed video as the key profit center of new movies.

Ok — so in the face of all this, why can I say this is all good news? Because a lot of waste is going to be cleared from the marketplace. Excess product will go away, the people who don’t take the business seriously will go away.

Hopefully those who make crummy movies will also go away, but — that may just be a personal wish.

In 1984, I went with Michael Eisner and Jeffrey Katzenberg to Disney as perhaps the fourth employee of the new regime. Disney at the time was barely a film producer much less a major distributor. Before we could execute the plans to transform that company into one of the Majors, I was asked to prepare the presentation to the Board of Directors. A lot of capital was at stake.

The numbers, like some of those we’ve discussed today, were overwhelmingly negative. In truth, the film business has never been an easy one to master. More companies fail than succeed.

But what I presented, and this is still one of the absolute truths of the industry, was that it was only a bad business on average.

If you expect to be an average performer in this world, you can expect to fail.

Those without the ambition or the brains to figure their way through these tough economic conditions are going to be the heart patients who cannot be saved. No one has a birthright in this business.

It is a game for winners. And those who win today will win to an even greater extent than at almost any point in the past. The flattening of the box office is only true on a macro level. For the individual film, the sky is the limit. Even though there’s more piracy of the hit picture than any other, it’s still that same hit picture that can score giant revenues in all the ancillary streams.

Those who will win will be smart about what they make and how they sell their films. They will hopefully make good films but perhaps — even more key — they will make unique films that stand out, which means they will not have to compete against the bulk of the films for talent. They won’t look like all the other films so they won’t have to spend as much money marketing them.

It’s not that the buyers aren’t there. Consumers, TV outlets, Retailers and, yes, even Pirates want what works.

Don’t believe me? Ask Summit about TWILIGHT. Ask Searchlight about SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE. Ask Screen Gems about DISTRICT 9. Ask Focus about CORALINE.

Let me conclude by saying that the challenges are great: Technological innovations often hurt before they help; it takes resources to fight the sense of entitlement that breeds piracy; it takes skill and experience to know what [U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt] FDR really meant when he said, “We have nothing to fear, but fear, itself.”

September 25 – 27, 2009. Can Bruce Willis top a meatball? Host Grace Randolph gives you the latest box office report plus her own review of Surrogates!

Steve relives the Vietnam War.Add this to your queueAdded: Sat Sep 26 20:43:09 UTC 2009Air date: Sun Sep 27 00:00:00 UTC 2009Duration: 21:53Closed captions available.

Having done this Mr. Cranky thing for some time now, I have been on the delivering end of a barrage of insults directed toward the writer of some movie for contributing to their craft what flies contribute to piles of dog shit. In fact, I’ve probably called for more than one writer to be immediately dismissed from the Writer’s Guild and thrown out onto the street to live in the alleys or the gutters or wherever it is that they can go where they can’t possibly inflict their idea of “writing” on the rest of us. I am guilty of the very thing I am now about to criticize other critics for doing.
That being said, I think it’s informative for movie-goers to understand how movies are made. Although the screenplay is supposed to be the foundation upon which a movie is built, the screenwriter has almost no control over what ultimately comes from their work. Yet, despite this simple fact that most critics should know (at least if they were good, well-informed critics), the screenwriter is most often blamed when a movie sucks balls.
This missive comes on the heels of a well-known movie that’s being raked over the coals and a screenwriter who’s taking punishment he should not have to take. I know the screenwriter and I read the script long before the movie was completed and can tell you it was one of the most tightly-written, funny scripts, I have ever read. I have read other scripts by this screenwriter and know him to be talented and an extremely gifted, hard-working writer who didn’t just get lucky in the industry, but worked his ass off polishing his work and learning his craft. I like to write the occasional script myself, but this writer kicks my ass in every conceivable way.
The second the script got green-lighted, it was hacked apart by the studio and the stars. And it’s not as if their intentions were necessarily bad or evil, but the mere act of taking a polished work by a talented person and reducing it to a mound of notecards that can be shuffled about and remade, is almost an act of evil. A good script, like any good piece of writing, is a work of art. However, we can be sure that if paintings were made for commercial release, movie executives would have long ago erased the Mona Lisa’s wry smile and put a big ol’ happy face on her to make sure everyone felt good looking at it.
In the case of this particular movie, the genre itself was changed from one thing into another to please the audience, which meant that lots of things were removed from the script and the writer forced to re-write them for better, easier, more pleasing effect. Has such an action ever produced something improved? I seriously doubt it. After that was done, a major star was hired to play one of the parts, and immediately demanded to make changes to the script to make him look better and based on his assumption that he was both a writer and an actor and clearly a better writer than the screenwriter. Can one imagine a screenwriter telling an actor how to act? Certainly not. But virtually every actor in Hollywood believes that they know better than the writer what good writing is and are ready and willing to destroy a cogent piece of writing whenever it suits their needs.
This sort of occurrence is commonplace in Hollywood. While such collaboration sometimes produces good movies, it most often produces mediocre, dumbed-down crap. Everybody in the process shits all over the writer and then the writer is blamed for the final product. Critics across the country take great glee in bringing up the writer’s name precisely because the writer is virtually powerless to fight back. It’s easy to blame the writer. However, start calling Tom Hanks or Christian Bale a talentless hack for fucking up some movie and you’re almost guaranteed to get a call from somebody telling you you’re no longer welcome at the free screenings. Film critics may want you to believe they’re independent, free-thinkers, but they’re mostly hacks themselves – wannabe screenwriters or filmmakers who don’t have the guts to take the risk of moving to Hollywood to follow their dream. If you still think film critics have integrity, just go to a PA tour sometime and you’ll see what every advertising executive knows – offer up a plate of donuts to a group of film critics and you can demonstrably improve a film’s reviews. Most film critics are closet whores just waiting for the chance to sell themselves.
Imagine movie stars and executives yanking lines from a Robert Frost poem to suit their needs. If poems were the foundation movies, they’d gladly do it. Writing isn’t an art in Hollywood, it’s a commodity – as easily disposable and changeable as a dirty t-shirt. The total lack of respect for the writer is why so many films in Hollywood suck.

Future Food Quiz: French Evolution
Don't miss the all-about-crepes episode of Future Food, then test what you learned. By Rachel Cernansky

What is molecular gastronomy?
The science of the physical and chemical processes that occur while cooking... Read the full story on Planet Green

Die Schauspielerin Chiara Schoras im TV Today Check über : "Wissen macht Ah!"

Is Your Beer Dark Green?
by Rachel Cernansky

When is the largest percentage of a beer's carbon footprint produced?
roasting the grains
in-store refrigeration
transportationRead the full story on Planet Green

Know the Biodiversity Hotspots?
By Matt McDermott

What is a biodiversity hotspot?
An area where there are unusually large concentrations of unique plant or animal species.
An area which has... Read the full story on Planet Green

Know Your Food Waste?
Test your knowledge about the dangers of food waste and what you can do to help. By Aliya Rinaldi

Out of all the food produced in the U.S. each year, what percentage of is wasted?
14 percent
Read the full story on Planet Green